Question From A Catholic Friend - How Do I Answer?

[Kaitlyn]

I have a question. I have a friend I've been talking to online who's Catholic and we're having a religious discussion. The last thing he asked me is if the Pope isn't infallible (guided by God to be so in spirtual matters while he is Pope) because he's human, then how can the Bible be infallible when it was written by humans (guided by God)? As in: "Why would God guide them to be infallible in a specific something for a specific time and not the Pope". I understand it, I just can't figure out how to word it right. Any ideas?

[Tall Timbers]

The Word declares itself Truth. And the Word says nothing about the infallibility of a pope... in fact, the catholic church itself only submitted to that blarney over the last couple of hundred years or so. Ask your friend to get a non-fiction book of the church. It doesn't matter who it is written by, whether it be a catholic or a protestant or a secular scholar.

Your friend will not only discover the political battling that went on over the centuries regarding papal infallibility, but will also get a good dose of a lot of ugly history perpetrated in the name of Christ, but certainly not sanctioned by God.

God gave us the Word, the pope was man's idea...

[pegmo]

Well the Bible, written by the Holy Spirit through men, is the revelation of Jesus Christ and God's plan of salvation. That is the purpose of His Word. Jesus is The Word made flesh per the apostle John. It isn't for a specific time and place - it is for all time, everyone and every place. God doesn't change. His plan of salvation doesn't change. Why do Catholics think there is a need for God to reveal anything else/new/different to those who choose to know and follow Jesus? The Bible is complete in its revelation about Jesus. There is no need for God to speak through anyone else.

This question - if God was infallible once through men, then there is no reason He could not be infallible again through men, is actually a true statement about God. He can do again what He already did. But this specific question about infallibility of the Pope ignores the underlying implication that God is revealing new and contradictory things now through a man or office (the Pope) or through many men (mystical revelations) etc. God doesn't contradict Himself. And there is no reason for God to reveal anything new or different from what He has already revealed in His Word. The Pope's argument is basically the same argument that Mohammed was using to claim Truth for His revelation about Islam.

In His Word, God reinforces the power and authority of His Word. He points believers to the Word. He does not point us to another voice to come, or to an office or to other men or anything else. God directs us to His Holy Scriptures.

It really comes down to a question of where one seeks their understanding and authority of God and what their source of Truth is, especially when there are contradictory sources. A) Does one believe a Pope who has established himself as an infallible authority (by recent decree as Tall Timbers pointed out)? Or B) does one believe some other prophet like Mohammed who claims additional and new information? or C) does one believe the Holy Scriptures which have proven themselves over time to be supernaturally accurate through their prophetic ability and through their power to change and transform sinful lives through faith in the biblically revealed Christ alone?

That's an easy one for me. I choose C) because the Holy Scripture has backed itself up by years and years and years of consistency and accuracy and Truth and the power of transformation in my own life.

Having been a practicing Roman Catholic for 50 years prior to the discovery of Jesus and His gospel of grace, I can testify that there is no such record of accurate Truth in the Pope's corner. And from a study of history, it is easy to debunk the claims of Mohammed.

So head to head, with competing Truths, The Bible and its Truth of Jesus Christ and His gospel wins hands down. And the God I know has not changed His plan. The Truth of His Word will never be diminished.....

[Kaitlyn]

This came from a discussion about the rapture actually. I believe it's before the tribulation, he believes it's after because of what he's learned in the Catholic church. He believes it because the Pope says so. I said I think you have to study the Bible on your own, you can't just follow someone else without ever looking into it yourself. Then came that question. I'm just not sure these answers (while good) are the answers he's looking for.

[pegmo]

This came from a discussion about the rapture actually. I believe it's before the tribulation, he believes it's after because of what he's learned in the Catholic church. He believes it because the Pope says so. I said I think you have to study the Bible on your own, you can't just follow someone else without ever looking into it yourself. Then came that question. I'm just not sure these answers (while good) are the answers he's looking for.

Well it still comes down to what the source of Truth is for someone. A man, or God's Word.

Has this person read the bible from cover to cover? (I am assuming the answer is no). If not, that's the place to start. Encourage this person in this area. And tell him to pray to God to help him understand the Truth when he reads, not just what he's been taught or heard from somewhere else.

[pegmo]

And if this person is not born again, which I assume he is not, then point him to Romans where it emphasizes "imputed righteousness" of Jesus Christ and that we have no righteousness of our own. Catholics are steeped in the concept of creating their own righteousness. Emphasize that the gospel is about what Jesus Christ already completed on our behalf. It is a work of God. It is not about anything we can do other than to trust in God's work.

He needs to see his need, and he needs to understand that he has no other hope than Jesus. And he needs to understand that he needs to personally come to Christ to repent, ask for salvation and submit to Him alone.

[Kaitlyn]

^ He says he is saved. And we've had discussions about what that means, so I think he is. And talking him about reading the Bible is something I've been doing. He says he doesn't trust his own opinion. He thinks God set the Pope up so everyone could have true interpertaion of the Bible.

[pegmo]

^ He says he is saved. And we've had discussions about what that means, so I think he is. And talking him about reading the Bible is something I've been doing. He says he doesn't trust his own opinion. He thinks God set the Pope up so everyone could have true interpertaion of the Bible.

If he thinks the Pope was set up for the purpose of true interpretation, he must have a misguided idea about the purpose of the indwelt Holy Spirit. The bible says the Holy Spirit is our guide to all Truth. The role he assigned to the Pope is substituting a man for the role that the bible said is one of God alone.

Having been Catholic, I know it will be hard to deal with these secondary issues such as the rapture and final authority until your friend is actually born again. Once you are both being led by the same spirit, he will understand. Until then, its an uphill battle.

I know he says he's saved, and I know you think he's saved, but anyone deferring to the Pope, instead of Jesus and the Holy Spirit is very confused.

And anyone who does not have a hunger for The Word of God which testifies to Christ, sends up a red flag about where they are at because the indwelt Spirit testitifes to the Truth of Jesus Christ and points those of Christ to The Word.

Anyone comfortable worshipping in a service where Christ is re-offered in an unbloody sacrifice for ongoing forgiveness of sins and submits to another intermediary such as a priest instead of Jesus alone, is still very confused about why Jesus is unique, who Christ is and what He accomplished. And its pretty hard to have total faith in the sufficient and completed work of Christ if you don't understand those Truths about who He is or what He did and how completely unworthy you are in relation to Him.

[Boash]

Being an ex-catholic myself I would challenge the papal infallibitity using church history as Tall Timbers suggested. Here are few problems with it and it is part of the Church history that he can easily look up. As in all things "Don't take my word for it look it up"

1. Pope Victor in 192 first approved of Montanism and then condemned it.
2. Marcellinus was an idolator; he entered the Temple of Vesta and offered incense to the goddess.
3. Paschal II and Eugenius III authorized dueling. Julius II and Pius IV forbid it.
4. Eugenius VI approved the Council of Basel and the reinstitution of the chalice of the Church of Bohemia. Pius II revoked the concession.
5. Hadrian II declared civil marriages to be valid, Pius VII condemned them
6. The dogma of the Assumption of Mary, officially declared on November 1, 1950, was rejected as heresy by Pope Gelasius in 495 , Not even one hundred years after that, Pope Hormisdas condemned as heretics any authors that taught the doctrine of the Assumption of Mary. Hormisdas was condemned as a heretic himself around a hundred years after that at the Sixth Ecumenical Council (680-681)

These do not sound all that infallible to me, how ever the one thing that realy salted it all for me with the papal infallibility thing. And what stuck in my craw the most and made me question the pope was seeing all the pictures of people bowing down to him and kissing his ring and the only thing I kept thinking about when I would see them is this.

Revelation 19:10 At this I fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, "Do not do it! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers who hold to the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."

I could not rectify in my mind how if he was "infallible" He could allow people to do something that is scripturally wrong.

[Kaitlyn]

^^ It's so hard to explain this all to him, because I really don't want to upset him. This is how he's been raised and he's not willing to change that. Everything else he asked, I could easily explain but they way he worded that ... I just can't find the right words.

He was also asking if we can read the Bible and understand for ourselves with the Holy Spirt, then why are there different denominations. I think I explained that one though.

^ THANK YOU! I'm telling him that now. I may add to it later, but I think that's the kind of answer he needs!

[pegmo]

Being an ex-catholic myself I would challenge the papal infallibitity using church history as Tall Timbers suggested. Here are few problems with it and it is part of the Church history that he can easily look up. As in all things "Don't take my word for it look it up"

1. Pope Victor in 192 first approved of Montanism and then condemned it.
2. Marcellinus was an idolator; he entered the Temple of Vesta and offered incense to the goddess.
3. Paschal II and Eugenius III authorized dueling. Julius II and Pius IV forbid it.
4. Eugenius VI approved the Council of Basel and the reinstitution of the chalice of the Church of Bohemia. Pius II revoked the concession.
5. Hadrian II declared civil marriages to be valid, Pius VII condemned them
6. The dogma of the Assumption of Mary, officially declared on November 1, 1950, was rejected as heresy by Pope Gelasius in 495 , Not even one hundred years after that, Pope Hormisdas condemned as heretics any authors that taught the doctrine of the Assumption of Mary. Hormisdas was condemned as a heretic himself around a hundred years after that at the Sixth Ecumenical Council (680-681)

These do not sound all that infallible to me, how ever the one thing that realy salted it all for me with the papal infallibility thing. And what stuck in my craw the most and made me question the pope was seeing all the pictures of people bowing down to him and kissing his ring and the only thing I kept thinking about when I would see them is this.

Revelation 19:10 At this I fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, "Do not do it! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers who hold to the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."

I could not rectify in my mind how if he was "infallible" He could allow people to do something that is scripturally wrong.

All excellent points. "Time will Tell" is a great phrase.....the "infallibility" of the Pope has not held up well even over a very short period of time. The Bible however, its Truth has proven itself time, after time, after time....

[Kaitlyn]

"Used to be, careful with those. How about you ask them to provide the proof? Because I don't think any are real, and I would need to see where they get the notion that they are, so that I may refute them. I shouldn't really have to look it up as the burden of proof would be on those making the claims. They're just tossing accusations without sources at me. In order to refute them, I need to know where they came from."

[Kaitlyn]

The role he thinks the pope fills is the role the Holy Spirit fills. And I can't make him understand that. Can you guys just pray for him?

[comeuphere]

God gave His Creation a wonderful love-letter and in it, He wrote everything that we would need to know to spend Eternity with Him. In His 66 books, He had chosen men to write down His words and they wrote what He inspired them to write. Priests,pastors, teachers, and anyone else human cannot and should not replace the very words of God Himself. If your friend wants to truly know God and what God wants and desires for his life, he will sit down, open the Bible (God's personal love-letter) to him and pray that God Himself teaches him Truth and answers his questions. God will do this for any child of His and delights in our coming to Him instead of imperfect men and women. Agnostic or atheist?...the Word of God is there for you as well. Christians...including me... need to be in the Word of God constantly. Open the letter and read it all...God will make clear to us what He wants to teach us everytime we do. The pope, and any other human being, are sinners...some saved by Grace and the others not. No one should be bowing down to anyone but God Himself...that is blasphemy.

[pegmo]

Kaitlyn, I would be happy to pray for your friend.....I know that one of the reasons I am saved today, is because others prayed for me.

Pegmo

[Hootmon]

The role he thinks the pope fills is the role the Holy Spirit fills. And I can't make him understand that.

"But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.
(Joh 14:26)

G3875
παράκλητος
paraklētos
Thayer Definition:
1) summoned, called to one’s side, especially called to one’s aid
1a) one who pleads another’s cause before a judge, a pleader, counsel for defense, legal assistant, an advocate
1b) one who pleads another’s cause with one, an intercessor
1b1) of Christ in his exaltation at God’s right hand, pleading with God the Father for the pardon of our sins
1c) in the widest sense, a helper, succourer, aider, assistant
1c1) of the Holy Spirit destined to take the place of Christ with the apostles (after his ascension to the Father), to lead them to a deeper knowledge of the gospel truth, and give them divine strength needed to enable them to undergo trials and persecutions on behalf of the divine kingdom
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: a root word
Citing in TDNT: 5:800, 782

No 'pope' required

[FrankBeMe]

This came from a discussion about the rapture actually. I believe it's before the tribulation, he believes it's after because of what he's learned in the Catholic church. He believes it because the Pope says so. I said I think you have to study the Bible on your own, you can't just follow someone else without ever looking into it yourself. Then came that question. I'm just not sure these answers (while good) are the answers he's looking for.

Actually, there is no teaching on the rapture in the Catholic Church. In fact, they consider the tribulation period starting from the Ascension of Christ and ending at the Second Coming.

Pope Benedict XVI actually denounced the belief that we are in the end times. On Nov 18, 2007, the pope rejected the "recurring messianisms" that are continually announcing the imminent end of the world. He explained that "history is ongoing, and involves human tragedies and natural calamities.

Source--Catholic News Agency, "Natural Disasters and human tragedies do not mean the end of the world, says Pope," November 18, 2007

From the same article--Reflecting on the Gospel reading for this Sunday, the Holy Father recalled that, since its inception, the Church "prayerfully lives in the care of its Lord, scrutinizing the signs of the times and keeping the faithful on guard against the calls of messianisms, which from time to time announce the imminent end of the world ".

In other words, the pope is denouncing those of us who strongly believe that we're rapidly closing in on the end times. Messianism is the belief in the coming of the Messiah, or a movement based on this belief. The pope uses that term as some sort of insult toward us.

So, tell your friend that these are the basic Catholic beliefs of the end times:

There is no Rapture
The final trial (the Tribulation) is between the time of Christ and His Second Coming
An Antichrist will deceive many and shake the faith of many believers. (Side note--most Lutheran belief states that the antichrist is actually the institution of the papacy)
The return won't happen until all Jews recognize Jesus as the Messiah
At the time of death, we are immediately judged in the "particular judgment," which judges our faith and works. The results can put us in Heaven, Hell or the cleansing place (and non-biblical) purgatory.

(all of the above was from my paper "Perceptions on the Biblical End Times Prophecies" that I wrote in 2007 for the course History of Christian Thought, in which I earned an A from a very liberal, ELCA female minister.)

Ask your friend to look at the Catechism. Look at the authorities used for their teachings. Very little of it is Scripture. Most is from the early church councils and the encyclicals written by popes. This is why the church, though allowing their members to read the Bible, tells them that only the priesthood can rightly interpret it.

[OnceWasLost]

I have a question. I have a friend I've been talking to online who's Catholic and we're having a religious discussion. The last thing he asked me is if the Pope isn't infallible (guided by God to be so in spirtual matters while he is Pope) because he's human, then how can the Bible be infallible when it was written by humans (guided by God)? As in: "Why would God guide them to be infallible in a specific something for a specific time and not the Pope". I understand it, I just can't figure out how to word it right. Any ideas?

The easiest way to answer this is the pope throughout history can be proven wrong more times and more ways than can be counted. The Word is the total opposite, not a single swing-and-a-miss like the papal line has. It is obvious to whom The Spirit spoke.

[DJHere]

^ He says he is saved. And we've had discussions about what that means, so I think he is. And talking him about reading the Bible is something I've been doing. He says he doesn't trust his own opinion. He thinks God set the Pope up so everyone could have true interpertaion of the Bible.

Ask him where God's word teaches the pope infallible. There is only one person who God's word declared perfect and that is Jesus:

17Since you call on a Father who judges each man's work impartially, live your lives as strangers here in reverent fear. 18For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, 19but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. 20He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake. 21Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God. (1 Peter 1)


Ask him if anyone has ever read this Scripture to him:

26I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray. 27As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him. (1 John 2)

or this one:

9However, as it is written:
"No eye has seen,
no ear has heard,
no mind has conceived
what God has prepared for those who love him"— 10but God has revealed it to us by his Spirit.
The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. 11For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man's spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us. 13This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. 14The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment:
16"For who has known the mind of the Lord
that he may instruct him?" But we have the mind of Christ. (1 Cor. 2)

Who do these Scriptures teach is to be our teacher and guide? The Holy Spirit.

If he will listen point him to 1 John 4:

1Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.
4You, dear children, are from God and have overcome them, because the one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world. 5They are from the world and therefore speak from the viewpoint of the world, and the world listens to them. 6We are from God, and whoever knows God listens to us; but whoever is not from God does not listen to us. This is how we recognize the Spirit of truth and the spirit of falsehood.

Ask him how do we listen to them today? Through the inspired writings they left behind.

[nickel1909]

Actually, there is no teaching on the rapture in the Catholic Church. In fact, they consider the tribulation period starting from the Ascension of Christ and ending at the Second Coming.

Aye, there isn't a rapture teaching in the Catholic faith. I can understand why they don't teach it, due to the idea of the rapture didn't show up until the 1730s.

When debating/discussing with Catholics, I always have to keep in mind history, where the Catholic church, was the first church.. and then it split into the Roman Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox.. and split further from there.

You could discuss with your friend that the Pope has become more of a figurehead for the Catholic faith, much like the Queen of England has become for their government, but the Bible has always remained the same since it was written..?